| 研究生: |
林奕彤 Lin, I-Tung |
|---|---|
| 論文名稱: |
數位時代下的媒體議價:國際立法取徑之比較研究 Media Bargaining in the Digital Era: A Comparative Study of International Legislative Approaches |
| 指導教授: |
莊弘鈺
Chuang, Hung-Yu |
| 口試委員: |
盧建誌
Lu, Chien-Chih 陳皓芸 Chen, Hao-Yun |
| 學位類別: |
碩士
Master |
| 系所名稱: |
商學院 - 科技管理與智慧財產研究所 Graduate Institute of Technology, Innovation and Intellectual Property Management |
| 論文出版年: | 2025 |
| 畢業學年度: | 114 |
| 語文別: | 中文 |
| 論文頁數: | 141 |
| 中文關鍵詞: | 新聞議價 、網路平台 、著作權 、競爭法 、歐盟數位單一市場著作權指令 、澳洲新聞媒體議價法 |
| 外文關鍵詞: | Media Bargaining, Online Platforms, Copyright, Competition Law, DSM Directive, News Media And Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code |
| 相關次數: | 點閱:45 下載:13 |
| 分享至: |
| 查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
隨著閱聽人獲取新聞資訊之方式改變,傳統上由電視、廣播、報紙獲取新聞之型態,已大幅度為搜尋引擎、社群平台所重塑。新聞業所高度仰賴之廣告收入,於數位時代下亦面臨嚴峻挑戰,有漸高之比例為並未實際產出新聞內容之科技平台業者所攫取。於此情形下,新聞業之傳統盈利模式受到嚴重影響,新聞品質、媒體所扮演之第四權角色乃至於民眾獲知資訊之權利將同受威脅。因應此等困境,世界各國多有於法制上著手之例,例如澳洲以訂立《新聞媒體議價法》之專法方式介入,歐盟以《數位單一市場著作權指令》賦予線上新聞出版品著作鄰接權之保障,均為著例。
有鑑於此,本文將分析澳洲之專法規範模式、歐盟之著作權規範模式,以及尚未採取類似立法之美國如何採用其他政策回應此一議題。媒體議價仍為一發展中之議題,且由於不同國家之新聞產業於集中度、媒體規模均可能有相當差異,因此於討論比較法時,亦應綜觀產業背景、既有之監理文化、執行上之侷限性等因素,方可較具體解讀其規範成果。
我國作為立法上之後進者,應先證立我國新聞業所面臨之困境,以及於此政府立法介入市場之正當性與合理性。末以,雖我國目前已有複數版本之草案進入立法程序,惟各版本間仍未臻一致,例如應採取基金制或議價制,另亦有針對新聞議價法主管機關之討論。本文肯認專法形式為誠值參酌之比較法上立法方式,基金制與議價制亦均有其不可互相取代之功能性,惟是否於專法中採取雙軌制規範,本文則認為比較法未見此例,我國若採行雙軌制,雖非必然不妥,惟可能需有更多制度上之配套設計。另於主管機關之討論上,本文大致肯認交由數位發展部主管合乎我國行政慣例,惟視各國執行經驗,談判力量之不平衡仍為議價上重大障礙,因此仍宜適度思考公平交易委員會介入之空間。
As the way audiences access news content changes, traditional channels such as television, radio, and newspapers have been largely reshaped by search engines and social media platforms. Advertising revenue, which the journalism industry heavily relied on, has also faced severe challenges in the digital era, as a growing proportion is captured by technology platforms that do not produce news content themselves. Under such circumstances, the traditional business model of journalism has been seriously affected, leading to threats to news quality, the media’s role as the “fourth estate” and the public’s right to information.
In response, many countries have begun to address these challenges through legislation. For instance, Australia was the first country to introduced a regulation “the News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code” ,trying to force technology companies compensate media industry through a relatively fair negotiation process. Meanwhile the European Union adopted the “Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market “ to grant neighboring rights protection to online press publishers and news contents they created.
This study analyzes three approaches: the Australian specialized legislative model; the European Union’s copyright-based model, and the U.S. model, where no similar legislation has been adopted but other policies are used to address the issue. Given that media bargaining remains a developing topic and that countries differ in terms of media concentration, market structure, and regulatory culture, comparative analysis must take industrial background, regulatory traditions, and implementation limitations into account.In this way, to properly interpret the legislative outcomes.
As a latecomer in legislation, Taiwan should first examine the specific challenges faced by its journalism industry and assess the legitimacy and necessity of government intervention. Although several draft versions of a Media Bargaining Act have entered the legislative process in the Legislative Yuan (The congress of Republic of China, Taiwan), drafts introduced by different lawmakers and political parties still remain inconsistent. For instance, over whether to adopt a fund-based or bargaining-based mechanism, and over which authority should oversee implementation. This study acknowledges that the specialized legislative model is a valuable reference and that fund-based and bargaining-based mechanisms each serve distinct functions. However, introducing a dual-track system, which has no precedent in comparative law, would require additional institutional safeguards. Regarding the competent authority, assigning supervision to the Ministry of Digital Affairs aligns with Taiwan’s administrative practice, yet considering the persistent imbalance in bargaining power observed in other countries, this study suggests that the Fair Trade Commission (FTC) should retain an appropriate role in regulatory oversight.
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
一、線上平台之於新聞業之衝擊 1
二、媒體議價之他國取徑 2
三、媒體議價之我國立法進度 2
第二節 研究動機與目的 3
一、產業類型與管制文化之比較研究 3
二、比較法之研究 3
第三節 問題意識 4
第四節 研究範圍與方法 4
一、研究範圍 4
二、研究方法 6
三、研究限制 6
第五節 研究架構 7
第二章 我國媒體生態與平台對其影響 9
第一節 我國媒體盈利之情形 9
一、主要盈利模式 9
二、付費新聞內容之可能性 12
第二節 我國閱聽人獲取新聞資訊之情形 13
一、我國閱聽人獲取新聞資訊之媒介 13
二、我國閱聽人獲取新聞資訊之趨勢變化 14
第三節 媒體議價之必要性初探 15
一、證立平台服務就新聞資訊之影響 15
二、論證政府介入媒體議價之必要性 18
第三章 積極管制模式:以澳洲《新聞媒體議價法》為例 25
第一節 澳洲之媒體產業現狀 25
第二節 澳洲《新聞媒體議價法》之簡述 26
一、立法歷程 27
二、立法目的 28
三、定義問題 29
四、調解與仲裁機制 33
五、執行方式 35
第三節 澳洲《新聞媒體議價法》之執行情形 36
一、新聞業之執行狀況 37
二、立法上之批評 38
第四節 澳洲《新聞媒體議價法》執行之侷限性 39
第五節 小結 42
第四章 著作權管制模式:以歐盟立法模式為例 44
第一節 歐盟之媒體產業概覽 44
一、歐盟媒體業概述 44
二、歐盟媒體所有權 45
三、歐洲之媒體危機 47
第二節 歐盟《數位單一市場著作權指令》之簡述 48
一、立法歷程 49
二、既有法規 49
三、立法目的 52
四、與新聞相關之著作權立法 52
第三節 歐盟會員國之內國法化與執行情形 55
一、法國內國法化情形 55
二、西班牙內國法化情形 59
第四節 《數位單一市場著作權指令》立法之評析 63
第五節 小結 67
第五章 寬鬆管制模式:以美國規範方式為例 68
第一節 美國之媒體產業現狀 68
一、全國性媒體 68
二、地區性媒體 69
第二節 美國新聞議價相關草案簡介 70
一、聯邦法層級:以新聞競爭與保護法(草案)為例 70
二、州法層級:以加州新聞保護法(草案)為例 78
三、美國對新聞業所採取之其他協助手段 81
第三節 美國立法障礙之分析 85
一、對法案本身之批評 85
二、產業與政治因素 87
第四節 小結 88
第六章 管制模式比較與我國法制建議 90
第一節 各國法規之定義比較 90
一、媒體之定義 90
二、新聞之定義 91
三、平台之定義 93
第二節 立法目的之探討 94
一、著作權視角下之權利導向 95
二、專法下之「核心內容」 98
三、立法目的之比較與價值判斷 101
第三節 本文就我國制定媒體議價法之法規面建議 103
一、並無明顯反對採取專法之根據 103
二、對於平台業者之定義建議 105
三、對於新聞機構之定義建議 107
四、是否應採取類似澳洲法之「核心內容」規範? 108
第四節 可能解方:媒體經營之其他商業可能性 110
一、付費會員制 110
二、授權收入 113
第五節 小結 114
第七章 結論 116
第一節 研究發現 116
一、外國立法例是否已被證明有效? 116
二、主管機關選擇之討論 118
三、針對小型與地方媒體,議價可能非唯一解方 125
第二節 未來展望 128
一、新聞議價法應為終局或過渡機制? 128
二、目前似仍無需對於人工智慧為回應 130
參考文獻 133
中文專書
1.Jeff Jarvis(陳信宏譯),媒體失效的年代,2016年。
2.Richard Reeves(余波、王瑛芳譯),新聞到底該怎樣?, 2006年。
3.Tim Wu(黃庭敏譯),注意力商人:他們如何操弄人心?揭秘媒體、廣告、群眾的角力戰,2018年。
4.Victor Pickard(羅世宏譯),新聞崩壞,何以民主?在不實訊息充斥與數位平台壟斷時代裡,再造為人民與公共利益服務的新聞業,,2021年。
5.公平交易委員會,公平交易法之註釋研究系列(三):第二十五條至第四十九條,2005年。
6.林子儀,言論自由與新聞自由,1993年。
7.黃哲斌,新聞不死,只是很喘:媒體數位轉型的中年危機,2019年。
中文期刊論文
1.王立達,數位時代的新聞生機:媒體與平台議價協商之法制模式評估與選擇,台灣法律人,15期,頁48-68,2022年。
2.王惠敏、王俊豪,非營利原生新聞網站的營運模式與行銷策略:以《報導者》、《Right Plus多多益善》、《窩窩》為例,中國廣告學刊,28期,2023年3月,頁45-74,2023年。
3.李仁芳、陳文玲,國內新聞報導競爭規範之研究,行政院公平交易委員會第三屆競爭政策與公平交易法學術研討會,行政院公平交易委員會主辦,頁10,1999年12月28日。
4.林照真,分析程序化廣告交易如何弱化新聞媒體:臺灣在地研究初探,新聞學研究,157期,頁43-94,2023年。
5.林照真,電視新聞就是收視率商品-對「每分鐘收視率」的批判性解讀,新聞學研究,99期,頁79-117,2009年。
6.邱富裕、黃韋豪,社群媒體中同溫層效應對線上政治行為之影響,國家發展研究,24卷1期,頁37-73,2024年。
7.洪德欽,歐洲聯盟法的法源,華岡法粹,57期,頁1-42,2014年。
8.洪德欽,歐盟法的淵源,收於:洪德欽、陳淳文(編),歐盟法之基礎原則與實務發展(上),頁1-56,2015年。
9.高嘉鴻,歐盟 2019 年數位單一市場著作權指令概要,智慧財產權月刊,263期,頁6-22,2020年。
10.張傳賢,利己或利他:民眾於 2012 年總統選舉中重分配議題的立場,選舉研究,21卷2期,頁43-80,2014年。
11.許家馨,什麼樣的民主?什麼樣的新聞自由?-從民主理論視野分析美國新聞自由法制,政大法學評論, 124 期,頁1-71,2011年。
12.許曉芬,著作權與競爭法之新界線:從法國Google新聞議價案看著作鄰接權與濫用市場支配地位,公平交易季刊,30卷3期,頁1-48,2022年。
13.許曉芬,歐盟著作權最新修法趨勢與挑戰,智慧財產權月刊,197期,頁29-41,2015年。
14.許曉芬,歐盟數位單一市場著作權指令之變革,會計研究月刊, 406期,頁96-102,2019年。
15.陳奇偉,影響台灣紙本書在實體通路績效之研究,中華印刷科技年報,頁160-168,2016年。
16.馮震宇,歐盟著作權指令體制與相關歐盟法院判決之研究,收於:劉孔中(編),國際比較下我國著作權法之總檢討,頁491-543,2014年。
17.黃郁雯,競爭法與通訊傳播法管制之交錯,收於:公平交易委員會,第 22 屆競爭政策與公平交易法學術研討會論文集,頁213-231,2015年。
18.黃振家,廣告2.0:跨媒體整合(Cross Media),傳播研究簡訊,56期,頁24-27,2009年。
19.楊忠霖,競爭法與經濟管制,公平交易季刊,26卷1期,頁1-48,2018年。
20.楊智傑,歐盟網頁超連結著作權侵權責任與新聞網站超連結稅之研究,世新法學,13卷1期,頁1-57,2019年。
21.董夢杭、張正芬、吳學良、蕭義棋 ,切還是不切?三立電視的組織裂變,產業與管理論壇,23卷3期,頁112-113,2021年。
22.劉昌德、蔡蕙如、洪貞玲、張春炎,營收破壞,流通依賴:數位平台對臺灣報業與雜誌的經濟衝擊,中華傳播學刊,43期,頁7-55,2023年。
中文研究計畫
1.國家通訊傳播委員會,113年通訊傳播市場報告,國家通訊傳播委員會委託研究報告,2024年。
2.張陽郎、江雅綺、楊宗翰,跨國科技巨擘與在地市場競爭秩序之研究-以廣告資源為例 ,公平交易委員會委託研究報告,2022年。
中文碩博士學位論文
1.陳木隆,競爭時代台灣地方報紙經營之研究─以《宜蘭在地報》和花蓮《更生日報》為例,佛光大學傳播學系碩士論文,2009年。
其他中文網際網路資料
1.財團法人台灣媒體觀察教育基金會,衛星新聞頻道承接政府標案觀察報告(108/07/01-111/06/30),2022年12月,https://www.mediawatch.org.tw/sites/default/files/files/%E8%A1%9B%E6%98%9F%E6%96%B0%E8%81%9E%E9%A0%BB%E9%81%93%E6%89%BF%E6%8E%A5%E6%94%BF%E5%BA%9C%E6%A8%99%E6%A1%88%E8%A7%80%E5%AF%9F%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8A.pdf。
2.陳彥廷,主流媒體撤退,地方媒體興起!,報導者,2016年10月5日,https://www.twreporter.org/a/community-media。
3.方德琳、何榮幸,離開《端傳媒》,用區塊鏈平台讓好內容活下去──張潔平專訪,報導者,2018年4月9日,https://www.twreporter.org/a/interview-annie-zhang-the-initium-media-matters。
4.陳怡靜,不只是離散書寫,台灣的「香港學」出版基地如何有機生長?,報導者,2024年6月14日,https://www.twreporter.org/a/diaspora-hongkongers-publications-in-taiwan 。
英文書籍
1.CAMERON LINDSEY ET AL.,THE NETFLIX EFFECT: TECHNOLOGY AND ENTERTAINMENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY (Kevin McDonald, Daniel Smith-Rowsey eds.,2016).
2.ELEONORA ROSATI, COPYRIGHT IN THE DIGITAL SINGLE MARKET (2021).
3.ELI NOAM ET AL. , WHO OWNS THE WORLD’S MEDIA? : MEDIA CONCENTRATION AND OWNERSHIP AROUND THE WORLD (Eli Noam eds., 2016).
4.MARTHA MINOW, SAVING THE NEWS: WHY THE CONSTITUTION CALLS FOR GOVERNMENT ACTION TO PRESERVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH (2021).
5.RASMUS KLEIS NIELSEN, THE MANY CRISES OF WESTERN JOURNALISM: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ECONOMIC CRISES, PROFESSIONAL CRISES, AND CRISES OF CONFIDENCE (Jeffrey Alexander , Elizabeth Butler Breese, Marîa Luengo eds., 2014) .
英文期刊論文
1.Claudio Lombardi , Rethinking Journalism Protection: Looking Beyond Copyright, 15 J. MEDIA L. 1, 90-120 (2023).
2.Diana Passinke, An Analysis of Articles 15 and 17 of the EU Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market: A Boost for the Creative Industries or the Death of the Internet? 6-99 (Stanford-Vienna Transatlantic Technology Law Forum, EU Law Working Papers No. 49, 2020).
3.Edouard Treppoz, The Past and Present of Press Publishers’ Rights in the EU, 46 COLUM. J. L. & ARTS 3, 267–281 (2023).
4.Eleonora Rosati, The German ‘Google Tax’ law: groovy or greedy?,8 J. INTELL. PROP. L. & PRAC. 7,497 (2013).
5.Erick Franklund, Democracy Dies In Silicon Valley: Platform Antitrust And Journalism Industry, 95 S. CAL.L. REV. 1,162-210 (2022).
6.Federico Ferri, The Dark Side(S) Of The EU Directive On Copyright And Related Rights In The Digital Single Market, CHINA EUR. L.J. 7, 21-38 (2021).
7.Giuseppe Colangelo, Valerio Torti, Copyright, Online News Publishing and Aggregators: A Law and Economics Analysis of the EU Reform ,27 INTL. J. L. & INFO. TECH. 1,75-90 (2018).
8.Joan Calzada, Ricard Gil, What Do News Aggregators Do? Evidence from Google News in Spain and Germany, 39 MKTG. SCI 1, 134-167(2020).
9.Joshua Darr, Matthew Hitt, Johanna Dunaway, Newspaper Closures Polarize Voting Behavior, 68 J. COMMC’N 6,1007-1028(2018).
10.Karen Lee, Sacha Molitorisz, The Australian News Media bargaining code: Lessons for the UK, EU and beyond, 13 J. MEDIA L. 1, 36-53 (2021).
11.KB Heylen, Enforcing Platform Sovereignty: A Case Study Of Platform Responses To Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code, 26 NEW MEDIA & SOC’Y 12, 7277-7294 (2024).
12.Marcel Garz, Mart Ots, Media Consolidation And News Content Quality,75 J. COMMC’N 3, 195-206 (2025).
13.Michalina Kowala,Miłosz Malaga, Press Publishers’ Right and Competition Law: Case Comment on the French Competition Authority’s Decisions Against Google, 17 Y.B. ANTITRUST & REGUL. STUD. 30, 199-223 (2024)
14.Miquel Peguera, Spanish Transposition of Arts. 15 and 17 of the DSM Directive. An Overview of Some Selected Issues,17 J. INTELL. PROP. L. 5, 450-456(2022)
15.Neil Weinstock Netanel, Mandating Digital Platform Support for Quality Journalism,34 HARV. J.L. & TECH., 474-545 (2021)
16.Nicholas Lemann, Thinking the Unthinkable about the First Amendment, 153 DAEDALUS 3, 105-118 (2024).
17.P. Bernt Hugenholtz, Sam van Velze, Communication To A New Public? Three Reasons Why EU Copyright Law Can Do Without A “New Public”, 47 IIC INTL. REV. INTELL. PROP. COMPET. L. , 797-816 (2016).
18.Paul Matzko, A Link Tax Won’t Save the Newspaper Industry The Journalism Competition and Preservation Act Will neither Promote Competition nor Preserve Newspapers, 956 CATO POL’Y ANALYSIS,1-17(2023).
19.Phil Syrpis, The Relationship Between Primary And Secondary Law In The EU, 52 COMMON MARK. LAW REV. 2, 461-487 (2015).
20.Sofia Verza, et.al , Uncovering News Deserts In Europe : Risks And Opportunities For Local And Community Media In The EU, Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (2024).
21.Tadas Klimas, Jurate Vaiciukaite, The Law of Recitals in European Community Legislation, 15 ILSA J. INTL. & COMPAR. L.,63-93 (2008).
22.Tim Wu, Is the First Amendment Obsolete?, 117 MICH. L. REV. 547,548-581 (2018).
英文網際網路資料
1.Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, Digital Platforms Inquiry Final Report (2019), https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Digital%20platforms%20inquiry%20-%20final%20report.pdf.
2.Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, Mandatary News Media Bargaining Code Concepts Paper (2020),https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/ACCC%20-%20Mandatory%20news%20media%20bargaining%20code%20-%20concepts%20paper%20-%2019%20May%202020.pdf.
3.Australian Treasury, News Bargaining Incentive (2025), https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-03/foi-3868_0.pdf .
4.Blanca Lozano Cutanda, Carlos Vázquez Cobos, Questionable constitutionality of Royal Decree-law approving a temporary energy levy previously rejected by the Spanish Parliament (2025), https://ga-p.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Dudosa_constitucionalidad_eng.pdf .
5.Bruno Lefèvre, Philippe Bouquillion, Country Report 2023: France, EUROMEDIA OWNERSHIP MONITOR (Sep. 2023), https://media-ownership.eu/findings/countries/france/#elementor-toc__heading-anchor-1.
6.Centre for Media Transition, Review of the News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code Consultation Paper (2022), https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-02/c2022-264356-centre-for-media-transition-uts.pdf.
7.Daniel Francis, U.S. Senate Testimony for Hearing on 'Breaking the News: Journalism, Competition, and the Effects of Market Power on a Free Press (2022), https://download.ssrn.com/23/03/09/ssrn_id4383190_code2482198.pdf
8.Daniel J. Gervais , Can (IP) Law Help Preserve Quality Journalism? Rethinking News And Media Law In Europe (2024), https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/5143317.pdf .
9.Erik Peinert, Saving the News from Big Tech: The Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (2023), https://www.economicliberties.us/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/062023_AELP_JPCA_PolicyBrief_R2.pdf .
10.European Audiovisual Observatory, Key Trends:2025, Mar. 25, 2025, https://rm.coe.int/key-trends-2025-en/1680b4e91d .
11.Flew, Terry, Scott Fitzgerald, Caitlin McTernan & Rob Nicholls. Media and Internet Concentration in Australia, 2019–2022, GLOBAL MEDIA AND INTERNET CONCENTRATION PROJECT(2024), https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://gmicp.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/GMIC-Project-Australia-Country-Report-07092024.pdf .
12.Fred Gui, Yu Ouyang, Catherine Chen , Bill Reintroduction in the U.S. House, APSA Preprints (2025) , https://preprints.apsanet.org/engage/api-gateway/apsa/assets/orp/resource/item/67eb81ddfa469535b9439147/original/bill-reintroduction-in-the-u-s-house.pdf .
13.Global Media & Internet Concentration Project, Media Ownership And Concentration In The United States Of America, 1984-2023 (2025) , https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://gmicp.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/GMIC-Project-USA-Country-Report-02022025.pdf.
14.Google, Review Of The News Media And Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code :Google’s Response To Treasury’s Consultation Paper (2022), https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-02/c2022-264356-google.pdf .
15.Jeff Jarvis, The California Journalism Preservation Act: Analysis and Alternatives(2024), https://cfce.calchamber.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/CJPA-analysis-Jeff-Jarvis-2024.pdf.
16.Josef Slerka, Katerina Hrubesova, Stepan Sanda, Country Report 2022: Czech, EuroMedia Ownership Monitor (2022), https://media-ownership.eu/findings/countries/czechia/ .
17.Laura Ene Iancu, Top Players In The European AV Industry Ownership And Concentration 2023 Edition, European Audiovisual Observatory (2024), https://rm.coe.int/top-players-in-the-european-av-industry-2023-l-ene-iancu/1680af3205 .
18.Nic Newman, Richard Fletcher, Craig T. Robertson, Amy Ross Arguedas, Rasmus Kleis Nielsen, Digital News Report 2024, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (2024), https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2024.
19.Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, Explanatory Memorandum: Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021,https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Revised%20explanatory%20memorandum.pdf.
20.Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia(2021), Explanatory Memorandum: Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021,https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Revised%20explanatory%20memorandum.pdf.
21.Pedro Jerónimo, Giovanni Ramos, Luísa Torre, News Deserts Europe 2022: Portugal Report (2022), https://labcom.ubi.pt/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/news_deserts_europe_2022_.pdf.
22.Penelope Muse Abernathy,The Expanding News Desert, Hussman School of Journalism and Media(2018), https://www.cislm.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/The-Expanding-News-Desert-10_14-Web.pdf .
23.Pew Research Center, Americans’ Changing Relationship With Local News (May 7, 2024), https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2024/05/07/americans-changing-relationship-with-local-news/ .
24.Pew Research Center, How Americans Get Local Political News (July 24, 2024), https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2024/07/24/how-americans-get-local-political-news/ .
25.Reset Australia, Response to ACCC Review of the News Media & Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code (2022), https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-02/c2022-264356-reset-australia.pdf .
26.Reto Hilty,Valentina Moscon, ‘Modernisation of the EU CopyrightRules – Position Statement of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition’ ,MaxPlanck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper (2017), https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_2470998_12/component/file_2479390/content .
27.Rob Harding-Smith, Media Ownership and Regulation in Australia, CENTRE FOR POLICY DEVELOPMENT ISSUE (2011), https://cpd.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Centre_for_Policy_Development_Issue_Brief.pdf .
28.Terry Flew et al., , Media and Internet Concentration in Australia, 2019-2022, Global Media and Internet Concentration Project (2024), https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://gmicp.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/GMIC-Project-Australia-Country-Report-07092024.pdf .
29.The Treasury, News Media And Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code-The Code’s First Year Of Operation (2022), https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-11/p2022-343549.pdf .
30.United States Copyright Office, “Copdyright Protections for Press Publishers (2022), https://www.copyright.gov/policy/publishersprotections/202206-Publishers-Protections-Study.pdf.